| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The proposed development would, by reason of the loss of the retail unit, be harmful to the vitality and viability of North Street Minor Local Centre contrary to Policy DC16 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD and the guidance contained in the National Planning Policy Framework. |
| 2. | The proposed development would, by reason of its design, excessive height and width, scale, bulk and mass, fail to integrate with the existing parade of shops and appear overbearing, visually intrusive and incongruous in the streetscene harmful to the character and appearance of the surrounding area contrary to Policy DC61 of the LDF Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD. |
| 3. | The cumulative impact of the width and height of the access road and the lack of pedestrian access and pedestrian visibility splays would impede the pedestrian and vehicular entry and egress of the site harmful to highway safety contrary to Policies DC32, DC33 and DC34 of the Local Development Framework and the guidance contained in the National Planning Policy Framework. |
| 4. | In the absence of a legal agreement to secure contributions towards the demand for school places arising from the development, the proposal fails to satisfactorily mitigate the infrastructure impact of the development, contrary to the provisions of Policies DC29 and DC72 of the Development Control Policies DPD and Policy 8.2 of the London Plan. |
| 5. | The proposal, if granted planning permission on appeal, would be liable for the Mayor of London Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). Based upon the information supplied with the application, the CIL payable would be £2,102. Further details with regard to CIL are available from the Council's website. |
| 6. | Statement Required by Article 35 (2) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015: Consideration was given to seeking amendments, but given conflict with adopted planning policy, notification of intended refusal and the reason(s) for it was given to Mr Lawrence via email on 11th April 2017. |
